From the folks who support the Employee Free Choice Act now comes forced unionization. Our own Cory Mason is apparently the driving force for this gem. The Journal Sentinel has the story.
I guess forced participation in unions is the new freedom.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Obama on Public vs Private Health Care
I just caught a bit of President Obama's news conference wherein he stated, essentially, that if private sector health care is so good, affordable, etc... then it ought not have any problem competing with a public sector option.
So we have a president that ignores or doesn't understand the key difference between public and private sector economic activity. The difference of course is the source of revenue. Private businesses must earn their income by providing a product or a service that someone voluntarily chooses to purchase while the government just takes the money that they need, from the private sector.
I am slightly embarrased that we have a president say and apparently believe something so silly.
So we have a president that ignores or doesn't understand the key difference between public and private sector economic activity. The difference of course is the source of revenue. Private businesses must earn their income by providing a product or a service that someone voluntarily chooses to purchase while the government just takes the money that they need, from the private sector.
I am slightly embarrased that we have a president say and apparently believe something so silly.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Having it Both Ways
The Journal Times editorial today suggests that those opposed to low-income housing on Sixth Street are unreasonably fearful. The correlation between low incomes and crime happens only in those discredited high rise apartments that "are now being turned into ruble."
Ordinarily, when the JT or other liberals want to help the poor with your money, they argue that decreased poverty will result in decreased crime. This argument suggests a correlation between low incomes and crime. However, now that they want to bring low-income government dependents into downtown, they deny any such correlation. The apartments "would be homes for people whose luck may have changed, or people trying to work their way up from a hard life." Any concerns about crime are dismissed as unreasonable, fearful, and harmful.
Just thought I would point out once again the inconsistency associated with liberal thought.
Ordinarily, when the JT or other liberals want to help the poor with your money, they argue that decreased poverty will result in decreased crime. This argument suggests a correlation between low incomes and crime. However, now that they want to bring low-income government dependents into downtown, they deny any such correlation. The apartments "would be homes for people whose luck may have changed, or people trying to work their way up from a hard life." Any concerns about crime are dismissed as unreasonable, fearful, and harmful.
Just thought I would point out once again the inconsistency associated with liberal thought.
Monday, June 15, 2009
LiberTEA Racine Chooses Issues
LiberTEA Racine has selected three issues to pursue. They are, not in any particular order:
1) Opposition to the proposed Historic District Ordinance.
2) Support for the Choi's/Chun's effort to open a convenience store with a liquor license.
3) Opposition to Alderman Mozol's proposal which would extend aldermanic terms to three years, from two.
LiberTEA Racine is seeking to promote liberty in the Racine area. We will focus on local issues where we believe we have a reasonable chance for success. And We will be non-partisan.
Note that each of the above issues involves a loss of or potential loss of personal liberty at the hands of Racine government officials. The Historic District Ordinance would take home improvement and major maintainence decisions out of the hands of individual property owners and put them into the hands of government bureaucrats. The Choi's/Chun's are unable to sell a legal product, as they are the first victims of a new ordinance that outlaws the sale of packaged alcohol without a 2/3s (3/4ths?) vote by the city council, among other restrictions. And lastly, an extension of aldermanic terms would substantially chip away at the rights of voters to choose their own representatives.
LiberTEA Racine will focus on these issues initially. If you care to join us, look for our Calls to Action that will be a part of our Web site (under construction) and the blog, LiberTEA Racine.
1) Opposition to the proposed Historic District Ordinance.
2) Support for the Choi's/Chun's effort to open a convenience store with a liquor license.
3) Opposition to Alderman Mozol's proposal which would extend aldermanic terms to three years, from two.
LiberTEA Racine is seeking to promote liberty in the Racine area. We will focus on local issues where we believe we have a reasonable chance for success. And We will be non-partisan.
Note that each of the above issues involves a loss of or potential loss of personal liberty at the hands of Racine government officials. The Historic District Ordinance would take home improvement and major maintainence decisions out of the hands of individual property owners and put them into the hands of government bureaucrats. The Choi's/Chun's are unable to sell a legal product, as they are the first victims of a new ordinance that outlaws the sale of packaged alcohol without a 2/3s (3/4ths?) vote by the city council, among other restrictions. And lastly, an extension of aldermanic terms would substantially chip away at the rights of voters to choose their own representatives.
LiberTEA Racine will focus on these issues initially. If you care to join us, look for our Calls to Action that will be a part of our Web site (under construction) and the blog, LiberTEA Racine.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
It's Good to be the King
If you are the mayor of Racine, you get to spend taxpayer money on art. No need for oversight of any kind apparently. No approval from commissions, no design review committee, no permits required, no building inspections, no votes by the council.
But if you live on College Avenue and want to put new windows in your house, well...
But if you live on College Avenue and want to put new windows in your house, well...
RUSD Test Results Form Letter
An insider at RUSD headquarters has forwarded to me the following test results response form letter. Take a look.
For immediate release to media.
The (insert test name) results are in and we are very excited here at RUSD headquarters. We have shown improvement in (choose one: 5th grade math scores, 8th grade reading scores, graduation rate) at several of our schools. We believe (insert latest reform effort here) is beginning to pay dividends. We remain concerned with (choose one: truancy, 8th grade math scores, 5th grade reading levels) at this time. We are (choose one: cautiously optimistic, hopeful) about our prospects for continued improvement. Yet we recognize that we have (choose one: more hard work to do, a tough road ahead of us).
Sincerely,
(insert latest superintendent name here)
For immediate release to media.
The (insert test name) results are in and we are very excited here at RUSD headquarters. We have shown improvement in (choose one: 5th grade math scores, 8th grade reading scores, graduation rate) at several of our schools. We believe (insert latest reform effort here) is beginning to pay dividends. We remain concerned with (choose one: truancy, 8th grade math scores, 5th grade reading levels) at this time. We are (choose one: cautiously optimistic, hopeful) about our prospects for continued improvement. Yet we recognize that we have (choose one: more hard work to do, a tough road ahead of us).
Sincerely,
(insert latest superintendent name here)
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Government Causing Housing Problems
As city officials experiment with various punitive measures to address the declining condition of housing stock in Racine, they would be wise to consider their own role in creating the problem.
Consider that despite a declining population in Racine, the city has within the last several years approved two large and partially low income/rent subsidized projects, the Mitchell Wagon Lofts and Belle Harbor. Agencies abound to subsidize or pay outright the rent for these and other low income residences. No doubt about it, Racine officials love to help/enable the poor with your money.
Of course, someone has to pay for all this generosity. Said generosity is paid for in taxes. Racine's property tax rate is 50% higher than neighboring Wind Point, as an example. At some point, some people will decide that the costs, financial and otherwise, associated with a "give us your poor and huddled masses" government policy is too great to bear. So they will try to sell their home for which there are no buyers. This home is destined to become a rental property because of Racine's government, as buying a home and paying taxes is too expensive while all kinds of help is there for low income renters.
So the city adds a few hundred newly constructed, subsidized and TIFed housing units for the poor. Then what happens? They leave the neighborhoods for the good stuff. The landlord who owns a property or two in Racine is now competing, essentially, with the government that was instrumental in financing the new and better low income housing. They still have mortgages and taxes to pay, so something has to give. Perhaps they stop maintaining the property or they take in a marginal tenant. And this is the situation we find ourselves in now.
Harsh ordinances and fines will fix this problem, right?
Consider that despite a declining population in Racine, the city has within the last several years approved two large and partially low income/rent subsidized projects, the Mitchell Wagon Lofts and Belle Harbor. Agencies abound to subsidize or pay outright the rent for these and other low income residences. No doubt about it, Racine officials love to help/enable the poor with your money.
Of course, someone has to pay for all this generosity. Said generosity is paid for in taxes. Racine's property tax rate is 50% higher than neighboring Wind Point, as an example. At some point, some people will decide that the costs, financial and otherwise, associated with a "give us your poor and huddled masses" government policy is too great to bear. So they will try to sell their home for which there are no buyers. This home is destined to become a rental property because of Racine's government, as buying a home and paying taxes is too expensive while all kinds of help is there for low income renters.
So the city adds a few hundred newly constructed, subsidized and TIFed housing units for the poor. Then what happens? They leave the neighborhoods for the good stuff. The landlord who owns a property or two in Racine is now competing, essentially, with the government that was instrumental in financing the new and better low income housing. They still have mortgages and taxes to pay, so something has to give. Perhaps they stop maintaining the property or they take in a marginal tenant. And this is the situation we find ourselves in now.
Harsh ordinances and fines will fix this problem, right?
Monday, June 08, 2009
CityBank (of Racine) Failures
The Journal Times has an article today, curiously titled "Staying afloat," about a non-profit housing agency that is sinking fast.
The Racine Mutual Housing Association is a nonprofit organization that provides rental housing at below-market rates, according to the JT. Yet 95% of their clients are behind in their rent payments. The city will now allow RMHA to skip their payments to the city for the next ten months. Presently, the group owes $193,000 plus interest (interest amount not specified in the article) on a $200,000 loan made several years ago.
City Development Director Brian O'Connell said the group needs sound fiscal judgement to balance its compassion. In showing patience with struggling tenants, "they've put the whole organization at risk" O'Connell said.
The same might be said of the city. The city needs sound fiscal judgement to balance its compassion. In showing patience with struggling borrowers (several years, barely a dent in principal) the city is putting all the taxpayers at risk.
The best judgement of all would be for the city to leave banking to bankers and fire the bureaucrats who are wasting our money.
The Racine Mutual Housing Association is a nonprofit organization that provides rental housing at below-market rates, according to the JT. Yet 95% of their clients are behind in their rent payments. The city will now allow RMHA to skip their payments to the city for the next ten months. Presently, the group owes $193,000 plus interest (interest amount not specified in the article) on a $200,000 loan made several years ago.
City Development Director Brian O'Connell said the group needs sound fiscal judgement to balance its compassion. In showing patience with struggling tenants, "they've put the whole organization at risk" O'Connell said.
The same might be said of the city. The city needs sound fiscal judgement to balance its compassion. In showing patience with struggling borrowers (several years, barely a dent in principal) the city is putting all the taxpayers at risk.
The best judgement of all would be for the city to leave banking to bankers and fire the bureaucrats who are wasting our money.
Sunday, June 07, 2009
On Property and Policy
City officials always seem to be promoting a solution to this or that problem. Seldom do they discuss why the problem exists in the first place. How can you solve a problem if you don't know why it exists?
Consider the various proposals to keep area homes in good condition. So why are some home owners allowing their properties to deteriorate? We need to know the answer to that question before we can shape policy to address the problem.
Are the property owners in question just bad people who don't care or are they making rational investment decisions? If your answer is the former, then you might like spanking them with fines, new ordinances etc... but perhaps they are acting rationally.
What rational person would allow their property to deteriorate and decrease in value? Well, first we must understand that spending money on home maintainence is just one of millions of investment choices available to us. Are new windows a smarter investment than car repairs, school tuition, a 401K contribution? Perhaps some property owners have detirmined that property improvements in Racine are not a good investment.
Property taxes are high in Racine. Property improvements cost money AND result in even higher property taxes year after year. Property owners can't pick up and move their homes to avoid the high taxes but they can gradually divest from Racine. They can allow their properties to decline in value while choosing to invest their money elsewhere - where they think they will get a better return.
We can villify them, harrass them, or fine them and hasten their exit from Racine. But nobody is taking their place - we have a declining population.
A far better idea is to ask whether such people are behaving rationally, and if so, we should respond with rational policies to address the problem.
Consider the various proposals to keep area homes in good condition. So why are some home owners allowing their properties to deteriorate? We need to know the answer to that question before we can shape policy to address the problem.
Are the property owners in question just bad people who don't care or are they making rational investment decisions? If your answer is the former, then you might like spanking them with fines, new ordinances etc... but perhaps they are acting rationally.
What rational person would allow their property to deteriorate and decrease in value? Well, first we must understand that spending money on home maintainence is just one of millions of investment choices available to us. Are new windows a smarter investment than car repairs, school tuition, a 401K contribution? Perhaps some property owners have detirmined that property improvements in Racine are not a good investment.
Property taxes are high in Racine. Property improvements cost money AND result in even higher property taxes year after year. Property owners can't pick up and move their homes to avoid the high taxes but they can gradually divest from Racine. They can allow their properties to decline in value while choosing to invest their money elsewhere - where they think they will get a better return.
We can villify them, harrass them, or fine them and hasten their exit from Racine. But nobody is taking their place - we have a declining population.
A far better idea is to ask whether such people are behaving rationally, and if so, we should respond with rational policies to address the problem.
Catching Up, Random Thoughts
I have now been to two meetings concerning the historic district ordinance proposal. At both meetings, the powers-that-be insisted that they were there to discern what the people wanted. If this were the least bit true, there wouldn't be a third meeting. They would just scrap the idea that the people clearly don't want.
If you haven't been to a First Fridays, (every first Friday evening of the month, downtown Racine) you will be amazed at the amount, and quality, of the people congregating downtown. I remember well the genesis of this event. It was an idea starting with former first lady of Racine Joyce Smith. I admit I was very skeptical, wondering why a Friday instead of a whole weekend. I still think downtown Racine should have a weekend festival. Anyway, Joyce Smith was right and I was wrong about First Fridays.
For a place nearly devoid of development, yes I am talking about Racine, one must wonder why the city is looking at increasing the cost and the uncertainty of development projects via a new ordinance.
Even the liberal Journal Times opposes the historic district ordinance. I guess that makes us LiberTEA Racine folks a bunch of flaming liberals.
If you haven't been to a First Fridays, (every first Friday evening of the month, downtown Racine) you will be amazed at the amount, and quality, of the people congregating downtown. I remember well the genesis of this event. It was an idea starting with former first lady of Racine Joyce Smith. I admit I was very skeptical, wondering why a Friday instead of a whole weekend. I still think downtown Racine should have a weekend festival. Anyway, Joyce Smith was right and I was wrong about First Fridays.
For a place nearly devoid of development, yes I am talking about Racine, one must wonder why the city is looking at increasing the cost and the uncertainty of development projects via a new ordinance.
Even the liberal Journal Times opposes the historic district ordinance. I guess that makes us LiberTEA Racine folks a bunch of flaming liberals.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Q and A with Earl Chrisianson
Unglued local lefty Earl Christianson had some questions after attending last months tea party demonstration at city hall. He asked them in a JT letter to the editor. Here are a few and I will try to answer them:
Earl: Was violent or nonviolent action being advocated by the lady peddling campaign type pins containing a picture of president Obama within a circle and a line slashed accross the photo?
Answer: Yes.
Earl: How couild parents ignore the heart-wrenching sight of three preschool age children trying to navigate the uneven grass? One child carried a protest sign in one hand and held a toddlers hand with the other. Every couple of steps the toddler fell and a third child struggled to pull the youngster up.
Answer: I was there, but I didn't see any toddlers walking on the grass holding hands, but be assured Earl, had I seen any such disturbing behavior I would have instantly called child protective services and pressed for a full investigation into the matter.
Earl: Finally, why are unknown persons, operating through straw organizations, involved in this covert operation? What's the agenda?
Answer: Earl, these folks were under the mistaken assumption that it was permissable to assemble peacefully without a written published agenda. I could tell you the agenda Earl, but then I would have to inflict a violent or nonviolent action upon you. It is best that you just pretend you never saw that rally Earl, and please, try to get that disturbing image of children walking hand in hand out of your mind.
Earl: Was violent or nonviolent action being advocated by the lady peddling campaign type pins containing a picture of president Obama within a circle and a line slashed accross the photo?
Answer: Yes.
Earl: How couild parents ignore the heart-wrenching sight of three preschool age children trying to navigate the uneven grass? One child carried a protest sign in one hand and held a toddlers hand with the other. Every couple of steps the toddler fell and a third child struggled to pull the youngster up.
Answer: I was there, but I didn't see any toddlers walking on the grass holding hands, but be assured Earl, had I seen any such disturbing behavior I would have instantly called child protective services and pressed for a full investigation into the matter.
Earl: Finally, why are unknown persons, operating through straw organizations, involved in this covert operation? What's the agenda?
Answer: Earl, these folks were under the mistaken assumption that it was permissable to assemble peacefully without a written published agenda. I could tell you the agenda Earl, but then I would have to inflict a violent or nonviolent action upon you. It is best that you just pretend you never saw that rally Earl, and please, try to get that disturbing image of children walking hand in hand out of your mind.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Low Income Housing Venture a Waste of Money
Another day, another proposal for low income housing in Racine.
This time the proposal is for downtown Racine on 6th Street. The Racine Journal Times has the story. The building in question is a former YMCA owned by Emily Hill. Linda Ring Weber, Executive Director of The Housing Authority of Racine County wants to convert the building into 10 to 12 low income apartments.
This makes no sense whatsoever. Turning a gymnasium into housing will be extremely expensive. There would be a water hookup fee of a few thousand dollars per unit and let us not forget the prohibitively expensive sprinkler system that would be required. Well, prohibitive for the private sector anyway.
These are the reasons why large downtown buildings have not been coverted to apartments. The cost is way too high, water taxes and requirements are very expensive and taxes on the improvements sap any potential for profits.
Now only government has the resources remaining to build in Racine. My guess is this will cost over $2 million if it is completed. And this will be money spent unnecessarily. The Housing Authority already has an office and Racine has a surplus of low income housing.
Instead of wasting this money on real estate development, the Housing Authority should instead spend the money on housing its clients in the empty homes that already exist.
This time the proposal is for downtown Racine on 6th Street. The Racine Journal Times has the story. The building in question is a former YMCA owned by Emily Hill. Linda Ring Weber, Executive Director of The Housing Authority of Racine County wants to convert the building into 10 to 12 low income apartments.
This makes no sense whatsoever. Turning a gymnasium into housing will be extremely expensive. There would be a water hookup fee of a few thousand dollars per unit and let us not forget the prohibitively expensive sprinkler system that would be required. Well, prohibitive for the private sector anyway.
These are the reasons why large downtown buildings have not been coverted to apartments. The cost is way too high, water taxes and requirements are very expensive and taxes on the improvements sap any potential for profits.
Now only government has the resources remaining to build in Racine. My guess is this will cost over $2 million if it is completed. And this will be money spent unnecessarily. The Housing Authority already has an office and Racine has a surplus of low income housing.
Instead of wasting this money on real estate development, the Housing Authority should instead spend the money on housing its clients in the empty homes that already exist.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Walden School and Sustainability
Walden Students are learning about sustainability according to a small article in todays Journal Times. Good for them.
According to the article, the class was initially developed by the Keystone Center for Education and funded by Sustainable Racine.
The first thing these students should be taught - I am not holding my breath - is the manner in which these organizations are sustained, or not. These organizations are sustained by donations. And these donations were made possible by wealth creation. And wealth creation is best achieved in countries with free economies.
Walden students are to "develop and ultimately implement a project that will enhance the sustainability of Racine's future." Great! My hope is that these projects will reflect an understanding that "sustainability" is best achieved in a capitalist and free country. We shall see.
And Sam Braun, I will be counting on you for the sensible insiders perspective.
According to the article, the class was initially developed by the Keystone Center for Education and funded by Sustainable Racine.
The first thing these students should be taught - I am not holding my breath - is the manner in which these organizations are sustained, or not. These organizations are sustained by donations. And these donations were made possible by wealth creation. And wealth creation is best achieved in countries with free economies.
Walden students are to "develop and ultimately implement a project that will enhance the sustainability of Racine's future." Great! My hope is that these projects will reflect an understanding that "sustainability" is best achieved in a capitalist and free country. We shall see.
And Sam Braun, I will be counting on you for the sensible insiders perspective.
Socialism and Poverty
David Riemer thinks we can end poverty. Riemer is the director of policy and planning at Community Advocates of the Public Policy Institute.
Riemer argues, in a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel commentary on Sunday, that "potential policy packages must be well-conceived and evidence-based, shaped by the poor themselves and rigorously tested..." Among his suggestions are to "raise the minimum Supplemental Security Income and Social Security payments to the poverty line plus $1... a WPA-like transitional jobs program.... and a somewhat higher minimum wage plus an increased earned income tax credit."
Additionally, we need to attack racism, greatly improve the health insurance system, improve the health and education of children etc....
The common thread to all this of course is increased government power and massive income redistribution, or, to be less delicate, socialism.
I wonder if Mr Riemer is interested in the evidence-based and rigorously tested outcomes of the myriad of socialist experiments throughout the world in the last hundred years or so. If he was, he would realize that socialism is not a solution to poverty but one of its main causes.
Riemer argues, in a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel commentary on Sunday, that "potential policy packages must be well-conceived and evidence-based, shaped by the poor themselves and rigorously tested..." Among his suggestions are to "raise the minimum Supplemental Security Income and Social Security payments to the poverty line plus $1... a WPA-like transitional jobs program.... and a somewhat higher minimum wage plus an increased earned income tax credit."
Additionally, we need to attack racism, greatly improve the health insurance system, improve the health and education of children etc....
The common thread to all this of course is increased government power and massive income redistribution, or, to be less delicate, socialism.
I wonder if Mr Riemer is interested in the evidence-based and rigorously tested outcomes of the myriad of socialist experiments throughout the world in the last hundred years or so. If he was, he would realize that socialism is not a solution to poverty but one of its main causes.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Owner or Renter
Yesterday I happened upon some folks from the proposed historic district of Racine whom I have known for quite some time. For several minutes we discussed the pros and cons of the proposed ordinance. The three of them were mostly favorable towards the idea, though they acknowledged some potential pitfalls and at least one of them was uncomfortable with the coercion necessary to achieve results.
All in all it was a rational discussion until one of them suggested that we can't own history, and that we can only rent it. Naturally I pounced all over that thought, asking from whom was she renting. She didn't answer that question but it isn't too difficult to figure out. We share our history collectively, we take care of it collectively, and any issues involving our history would be resolved via the collective, ie government.
I believe she has perhaps inadvertantly touched on the central issue here. Who's homes are these? What does ownership mean? Are we caretakers, renters from society, or owners? What do these differences mean with respect to the proposed ordinance?
My own view is that ownership means something and that the history worth preserving here is the historical understanding of ownership. And we should vigorously resist the city's latest attempt to chip away at that foundation.
All in all it was a rational discussion until one of them suggested that we can't own history, and that we can only rent it. Naturally I pounced all over that thought, asking from whom was she renting. She didn't answer that question but it isn't too difficult to figure out. We share our history collectively, we take care of it collectively, and any issues involving our history would be resolved via the collective, ie government.
I believe she has perhaps inadvertantly touched on the central issue here. Who's homes are these? What does ownership mean? Are we caretakers, renters from society, or owners? What do these differences mean with respect to the proposed ordinance?
My own view is that ownership means something and that the history worth preserving here is the historical understanding of ownership. And we should vigorously resist the city's latest attempt to chip away at that foundation.
Friday, May 22, 2009
Fact or Fiction?
Driver: How fast was I going officer?
Officer: 15 over.
D: I suppose I am going to get a fine?
O: No Ma'am, we don't give fines or tickets anymore.
D: Excellent, then I will be on my way. Nice day officer.
O: Not so fast Ma'am. I need to issue you a vehicle speed inspection fee of $100.
D: A what?
O: We call them v-sifs for short. They're fast, less paperwork, more efficient, just easier all the way around for the city.
D: That's bull#$&*@! I will see you in court.
O: No ma'am you won't. The beauty of the v-sif is that you no longer get to contest the charges, er, the fee, in court. Like I said, we've got a real efficient operation here thanks to the aldermen and the mayor of Racine.
D: Well, what about my rights? What about the three branches of government? Can you just do away with the judicial branch? Ever hear of due process? Don't we have a constitution?
O: All good questions ma'am. But as an officer I am part of the executive branch, as you know. I enforce the laws. You might want to take up your concerns with the mayor.
D: Oh sure, the new mayor. He was just sworn in, right? And he swore to uphold the constitution, right?
O: Ma'am, I just noticed that you pulled over by parking meter. I am going to need to issue you a p-mif of $20. It's like the v-sif but for parking meters. Real efficient, easy, less paperwork...
Question: What is the difference between this scenerio and the "fees" issued by UNIT (Unified Neighborhood Inspection Team) other than that the offense is not happening to you?
Officer: 15 over.
D: I suppose I am going to get a fine?
O: No Ma'am, we don't give fines or tickets anymore.
D: Excellent, then I will be on my way. Nice day officer.
O: Not so fast Ma'am. I need to issue you a vehicle speed inspection fee of $100.
D: A what?
O: We call them v-sifs for short. They're fast, less paperwork, more efficient, just easier all the way around for the city.
D: That's bull#$&*@! I will see you in court.
O: No ma'am you won't. The beauty of the v-sif is that you no longer get to contest the charges, er, the fee, in court. Like I said, we've got a real efficient operation here thanks to the aldermen and the mayor of Racine.
D: Well, what about my rights? What about the three branches of government? Can you just do away with the judicial branch? Ever hear of due process? Don't we have a constitution?
O: All good questions ma'am. But as an officer I am part of the executive branch, as you know. I enforce the laws. You might want to take up your concerns with the mayor.
D: Oh sure, the new mayor. He was just sworn in, right? And he swore to uphold the constitution, right?
O: Ma'am, I just noticed that you pulled over by parking meter. I am going to need to issue you a p-mif of $20. It's like the v-sif but for parking meters. Real efficient, easy, less paperwork...
Question: What is the difference between this scenerio and the "fees" issued by UNIT (Unified Neighborhood Inspection Team) other than that the offense is not happening to you?
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Historic Designation Meets Resistance
I went to a public meeting tonight on the subject of turning the near south side of Racine into a historic district. What this would mean for property owners in the area is that alterations to their property would have to meet the approval of a commission, much like the one already in place downtown. Window replacements, roof reshingling, fences, porches, you name it, the decisions will no longer be made by the owners.
The reaction from the audience ranged from skeptical to hostile for the most part. Simply put, these folks didn't want to turn over the decisions regarding their property to the government.
Not everyone was opposed to the idea. One woman spoke in support and was generally well received until she said that not everyone is cut out for owning a historic home and that perhaps they should sell. She was shouted down, deservedly so imho.
Also speaking was Bob Hartman, a member of the Landmarks Commission that I believe is pushing this idea. Bob is a nice fellow but I believe he should have told the crowd that he stands to make money if the area becomes a historic district. How so? Well, Bob is a designer and would likely be on the commission, just as he is downtown. So he would probably get referrals to do the designs that would help his clients make it through the committee. Seems like a conflict of interest to me but at the very least Bob would likely profit from this move and I think he should have indicated as much to the audience.
Anyway, I am happy to report that a large number of property owners on the south side will not be handing over their property rights to the city without a big, loud fight. I just might like to join them.
The reaction from the audience ranged from skeptical to hostile for the most part. Simply put, these folks didn't want to turn over the decisions regarding their property to the government.
Not everyone was opposed to the idea. One woman spoke in support and was generally well received until she said that not everyone is cut out for owning a historic home and that perhaps they should sell. She was shouted down, deservedly so imho.
Also speaking was Bob Hartman, a member of the Landmarks Commission that I believe is pushing this idea. Bob is a nice fellow but I believe he should have told the crowd that he stands to make money if the area becomes a historic district. How so? Well, Bob is a designer and would likely be on the commission, just as he is downtown. So he would probably get referrals to do the designs that would help his clients make it through the committee. Seems like a conflict of interest to me but at the very least Bob would likely profit from this move and I think he should have indicated as much to the audience.
Anyway, I am happy to report that a large number of property owners on the south side will not be handing over their property rights to the city without a big, loud fight. I just might like to join them.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Teachers Union Using Adult Dupes
I started a bit of a fight over at the JT blog when I suggested that children shouldn't be used as pawns in political battles.
There was a protest organized by the Racine teachers union at a recent board meeting. They were lobbying for federal stimulus funds for more librarians. Several children, as young as nine, participated.
One of my detractors on the JT blog, 4kidsandacat had this to say:
Denis Navratil is assuming that parents are using children to achieve a political objective. How is having desire to have a librarian at a school full time considered a political objective? I don't get that, sir.
Well 4kidsandacat, desiring a librarian is not political. I have desired a few in my day as well. But the little darlings in question didn't just desire a librarian. They participated in a staged political protest organized by the local teachers union with the political objective of securing federal funds for more librarians. Does it get any more political than that? And 4kids, if you "don't get that" then you are as much a dupe as the kids. At least they have the excuse of being kids.
There was a protest organized by the Racine teachers union at a recent board meeting. They were lobbying for federal stimulus funds for more librarians. Several children, as young as nine, participated.
One of my detractors on the JT blog, 4kidsandacat had this to say:
Denis Navratil is assuming that parents are using children to achieve a political objective. How is having desire to have a librarian at a school full time considered a political objective? I don't get that, sir.
Well 4kidsandacat, desiring a librarian is not political. I have desired a few in my day as well. But the little darlings in question didn't just desire a librarian. They participated in a staged political protest organized by the local teachers union with the political objective of securing federal funds for more librarians. Does it get any more political than that? And 4kids, if you "don't get that" then you are as much a dupe as the kids. At least they have the excuse of being kids.
Monday, May 18, 2009
Racine Teachers Using Children in Political Fight
The Racine teachers union (aka Racine Education Association or REA) is now using elementary students to help fight their political battles. The REA and their child allies rallied at a RUSD Board meeting yesterday "in hopes that Unified will use federal stimulus money to bring more librarians to the district's elementary schools" according to the front page article intoday's Journal Times.
From the article:
"Speakers included Racine Public Library Director Jessica MacPhail, parents, a school librarian, Racine Education Association (REA) President Peter Knotek, a Unified alum and three elementary school children.
“We love to read,” said Maddy Bragulla and Sophia Formolo, both 11-year-old students at Schulte. The two spoke together at the meeting, asking board members to think of children before money.
Children also were outside before the meeting. Sam LaGuardia, a 9-year-old student at Schulte, held a sign reading, “We can’t access our school library without a librarian!”
“It’s confusing to all the other kids because they’re like, ‘is the library open or not?’” Sam said. “I’d like to go the library more often because we can check out more books and learn more interesting things.”
The rally was organized by the REA through flyers and word of mouth, Levie said."
I suppose that we are to believe that Sam and Maddy and Sophia were not coaxed by Unified teachers. Every nine year old I know just loves to scour the agendas of public meetings, looking for those issues that will prompt him to demand mom or dad to drive him to the meeting so he can hold up his hand made sign.
Does the REA have no shame? Stop using our children as political props. Fight your own battles.
From the article:
"Speakers included Racine Public Library Director Jessica MacPhail, parents, a school librarian, Racine Education Association (REA) President Peter Knotek, a Unified alum and three elementary school children.
“We love to read,” said Maddy Bragulla and Sophia Formolo, both 11-year-old students at Schulte. The two spoke together at the meeting, asking board members to think of children before money.
Children also were outside before the meeting. Sam LaGuardia, a 9-year-old student at Schulte, held a sign reading, “We can’t access our school library without a librarian!”
“It’s confusing to all the other kids because they’re like, ‘is the library open or not?’” Sam said. “I’d like to go the library more often because we can check out more books and learn more interesting things.”
The rally was organized by the REA through flyers and word of mouth, Levie said."
I suppose that we are to believe that Sam and Maddy and Sophia were not coaxed by Unified teachers. Every nine year old I know just loves to scour the agendas of public meetings, looking for those issues that will prompt him to demand mom or dad to drive him to the meeting so he can hold up his hand made sign.
Does the REA have no shame? Stop using our children as political props. Fight your own battles.
Prevailing Values
One David Backman wrote a letter to the Journal Times on Sunday concerning pending legislation about prevailing wage law.
He writes: The current discussion to strengthen the state's prevailing wage law intends to protect and sheild workers from unscrupulous business or communities that look to make a profit off of their hard labor. Prevailing wage is about providing a skilled, trained workforce and a whole lot more. It really underscores a set of values that many in the construction industry hold dear - maintaining wages, providing health benefits, producing training and apprenticeship programs, caring for your workforce.
So these are Mr Backman's values?. Businesses should not make a profit but Mr. Backman should get skilled training, good wages, health benefits and caring from businesses. In his final paragraph Backman calls for taxing the oil companies. "Better them than me." he says.
Get everything you can. Demonize business. Screw the other guy.
No thanks Mr Backman. I hope my values prevail.
He writes: The current discussion to strengthen the state's prevailing wage law intends to protect and sheild workers from unscrupulous business or communities that look to make a profit off of their hard labor. Prevailing wage is about providing a skilled, trained workforce and a whole lot more. It really underscores a set of values that many in the construction industry hold dear - maintaining wages, providing health benefits, producing training and apprenticeship programs, caring for your workforce.
So these are Mr Backman's values?. Businesses should not make a profit but Mr. Backman should get skilled training, good wages, health benefits and caring from businesses. In his final paragraph Backman calls for taxing the oil companies. "Better them than me." he says.
Get everything you can. Demonize business. Screw the other guy.
No thanks Mr Backman. I hope my values prevail.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)